Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zorin OS 16 is what a Linux desktop distribution should be

techrepublic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 60 posts

Re: Zorin OS 16 is what a Linux desktop distribution should be

#41

Post by II2II »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #10
edoceo wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that those words have actual meaning to actual users. You think its "useless" but like, that's just your opinion man.

Do they? What does "fun" mean here? "Beautiful"? "Easy to use"? These are all subjective terms at best. I can call Motif beautiful and no one can say I'm wrong.

Subjectivity is the point of those words. People need only agree that they are true, rather than agree upon why it is true, since it is meant to make people feel good about their decision. As for those who disagree, they don't really matter since they are not the target audience.

Re: Zorin OS 16 is what a Linux desktop distribution should be

#42

Post by flailingroof »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #5
l0b0 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ubuntu is based on Debian, another Linux distro, and was still a huge step forward. Building on the current best in class to create something better sounds like a sensible idea.

In what ways? That's all I'm asking. If you build something you think is so different from what it is based on that it deserves to have its own name+OS, then why can't you be bothered to say what it is that makes it different? Instead we get useless words like "fun", "beautiful", and "easy to use".

I very much agree with you, and I think an important reason to do so is that there isn't necessarily an objective "better". Debian's conservative release is great for production servers and stability. Ubuntu and many of these "OS" vendors' choices are great if you want exactly what you get and don't care too much about the things under the hood.

I love both Arch and Debian, but I usually use them for very different things.

Re: Zorin OS 16 is what a Linux desktop distribution should be

#43

Post by commoner »

bitL wrote: post #37

Does it finally support HiDPI? The last time I tried it (a few years back) it didn't.

Yes, instructions here:

https://forum.zorin.com/t/how-to-enable-screen-scaling-on-hi...

HiDPI support on Zorin OS is similar to that of other distros that use GNOME Shell.

Re: Zorin OS 16 is what a Linux desktop distribution should be

#44

Post by commoner »

kodah wrote: post #31

I was just looking at Zorin. I use PopOS as a daily driver and one of my favorite things about it is that it supports the firmware update manager. Zorin Connect is highly compelling, but without the firmware update manager I'm not quite sold.

I think the GNOME Firmware app should be a suitable replacement. It also uses fwupd/LVFS for firmware updates:

https://flathub.org/apps/details/org.gnome.Firmware

The GNOME Software app that's included in Zorin OS should also check for and be able to install firmware updates.

Re: Zorin OS 16 is what a Linux desktop distribution should be

#45

Post by checkyoursudo »

Koshkin wrote: post #24
l0b0 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ubuntu is based on Debian, another Linux distro, and was still a huge step forward. Building on the current best in class to create something better sounds like a sensible idea.

I don’t know about that… Recently I installed Ubuntu on a laptop, said “meh” and then replaced it with the stock Debian stable which has been working flawlessly. (Also, I feel like I trust Debian more than Ubuntu, although I’d have hard time explaining exactly why.)

Trusting two people with my secrets necessarily seems riskier than having to trust only one person with my secrets. Maybe the feeling is similar?

Re: Zorin OS 16 is what a Linux desktop distribution should be

#46

Post by wruza »

yunohn wrote: post #29
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what ways? That's all I'm asking. If you build something you think is so different from what it is based on that it deserves to have its own name+OS, then why can't you be bothered to say what it is that makes it different? Instead we get useless words like "fun", "beautiful", and "easy to use".

Did you read this article? Or visit ZorinOS’ website? Or do you somehow believe that only a 5 word motto should explain everything to you?

I did both and sure it’s just a oneliner in essence. Zorin kubuntu, zorin preinstalled apps, zorin jelly mode windows for zorin productivity. So much fun and much faster compared these regular unnamed unzorin meh-OS as you may have seen on a TV. That’s basically it.

Re: Zorin OS 16 is what a Linux desktop distribution should be

#47

Post by bubblethink »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #5
l0b0 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ubuntu is based on Debian, another Linux distro, and was still a huge step forward. Building on the current best in class to create something better sounds like a sensible idea.

In what ways? That's all I'm asking. If you build something you think is so different from what it is based on that it deserves to have its own name+OS, then why can't you be bothered to say what it is that makes it different? Instead we get useless words like "fun", "beautiful", and "easy to use".

Back in the day Ubuntu was sufficiently different from Debian due to Unity. You couldn't get unity any other way, and unity was one of the better DEs. These days, since everyone defaults to Gnome, there isn't a ton of difference between Debian and its derivates, and even Debian and Fedora derivatives. They are all about the same. The only different ones are the ones that are remarkably different, like NixOS or Fedora Silverblue.

Re: Zorin OS 16 is what a Linux desktop distribution should be

#48

Post by GekkePrutser »

This keeps reminding me of Christopher Walken for some reason :) [1]

Not sure if it's for me though. If it's good for a majority it probably isn't the best for me. It looks to have opinionated and minimalist design, some of the reasons I moved from macOS to KDE :) However perhaps some of the other 'modes' are better in that sense. I'll definitely try it out on distrotest one of these days.

[1] (Yes I know why :P)

Re: Zorin OS 16 is what a Linux desktop distribution should be

#49

Post by pfalafel »

bubblethink wrote: post #47
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what ways? That's all I'm asking. If you build something you think is so different from what it is based on that it deserves to have its own name+OS, then why can't you be bothered to say what it is that makes it different? Instead we get useless words like "fun", "beautiful", and "easy to use".

Back in the day Ubuntu was sufficiently different from Debian due to Unity. You couldn't get unity any other way, and unity was one of the better DEs. These days, since everyone defaults to Gnome, there isn't a ton of difference between Debian and its derivates, and even Debian and Fedora derivatives. They are all about the same. The only different ones are the ones that are remarkably different, like NixOS or Fedora…

Just came by to say that I still use Unity.

Re: Zorin OS 16 is what a Linux desktop distribution should be

#50

Post by bubblethink »

pfalafel wrote: post #49
bubblethink wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back in the day Ubuntu was sufficiently different from Debian due to Unity. You couldn't get unity any other way, and unity was one of the better DEs. These days, since everyone defaults to Gnome, there isn't a ton of difference between Debian and its derivates, and even Debian and Fedora derivatives. They are all about the same. The only different ones are the ones that are remarkably different, like NixOS or Fedora…

Just came by to say that I still use Unity.

Yeah, I do too on one of my laptops, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to use it. X is not going to get better, and some things like screen tearing, especially with rotated screens, are only fixed in wayland.
Post reply on HN